Navigate:

GOP maneuvers to change take-all system

Text Size

-

+

reset

Often when Republicans are worried about losing elections, they try to change the rules. That’s exactly what they are attempting in California right now with a statewide ballot measure regarding that state’s 55 electoral votes.

Let’s review a little history. In the early 1990s, Republicans were having a difficult time winning control of the U.S. House of Representatives because of a number of entrenched, veteran Democrats.

So what did Republicans do? They started promoting the concept of term limits so that veteran Democrats could not keep winning reelection.

The courts ultimately struck down term limits for members of Congress. Republicans won control of the U.S. House in 1994 for a variety of other reasons, but they had still tried to game the system to give them an advantage.

Then in my state of Texas, Republicans couldn’t defeat six veteran Democrats who kept winning GOP-leaning House seats. So they convinced the Texas Legislature to redraw the state’s congressional lines for a second time in a decade, to stack these swing districts with even more Republicans.

The newly Republican state legislature did redraw the districts in 2003, and Republicans were able to oust four veteran Democrats. (A fifth Democrat switched parties rather than run as a Democrat in his redrawn district.)

The legislature also redrew a seventh district (which had been controlled by minority voters) by splitting the minority community into five different districts, and thus the Republicans also picked up that seat (which I had represented for 26 years).

Now, along comes the Republicans greatest attempted power grab yet. They are asking California voters next June to change the way the state’s electoral votes are allocated – from a winner-take-all system to a congressional-district-by-congressional-district system.

Democrats have been carrying California in recent elections. Even if they were to carry the state in 2008, Republicans would get about 20 electoral votes under these new rules.

On the surface this sounds reasonable – award electoral votes to whichever party carries a particular congressional district. It might be reasonable if it didn’t constitute unilateral disarmament by the Democratic Party.

You see, Republicans aren’t proposing to give up some of their electoral votes in big states that they traditionally carry, such as Texas, Florida and Indiana.

They want to continue the winner-take-all system in their states but have Democrats share electoral votes in a big Democratic state. How stupid do they think we are?

Separate from the cynical Republican shenanigans in California, there is a compelling reason for the winner-take-all allocation of elector votes.

This system yields a result on Election Day. If all states adopted a congressional district voter allocation system, this would make it easier for third and fourth party candidates to win some electoral votes and thus increase the possibility that no one would win a majority of electoral votes on Election Day.

Such a result would force the election into the House of Representatives and delay a result until January, two months later.

An argument certainly can be made that the current winner-take-all system means that it is possible for one candidate to win the popular vote and another candidate win the electoral vote.

That’s exactly what happened in 2000 when Al Gore won the popular vote and George W. Bush won the electoral vote.

Some people are advocating a system under which each state would direct its electors to cast their electoral votes for the candidate who won the national popular vote.

Others say we should simply eliminate the Electoral College and have the winner determined by who wins the popular vote.

Millions of dollars will be spent for and against the Republican attempted power grab in California between now and next June.

Let’s hope that reason prevails and that the GOP is not permitted to stack the deck against the Democrats by selectively changing the election law in the biggest state in the country and nowhere else.

Republicans should be given a “Bronx cheer” for their cojones in their never-ending quest to alter the rules to help them win elections. That doesn’t mean the public should blithely go along with what they are trying to do.

Republicans should be forced to win elections the old-fashioned way – by campaigning hard and getting more votes than the other side.

Martin Frost, a Democrat, represented the Dallas-Fort Worth area from 1979 to 2005. He rose to caucus chairman and head of the DCCC. He is now an attorney with Polsinelli Shalton Flanigan Suelthaus PC in Washington and serves as president of America Votes, a grass-roots voter mobilization and education effort.

Readers' Comments (124)

Once again the democrats are trying to keep greater democracy out of "democracy." First they don't want the surge to help spread rights out equally and now they resist California adjusting its system to more equitably reflect the opinions and needs of its voters. What's next?

What a joke. You act like this doesn't happen on both sides of the aisle. I read where dems were trying to do the same thing in SC the other week but the DNC told them not to because it could start a trend of similar movements by repubs in bigger dem states like California...looks like they were right. Also, gerrymandering of districts always happens by the party in power to help them remain in power. You are just sour because it finally impacted your individual district. Don't blame the repubs for something both parties do. If you do not like it, start a movement to attempt to change state and local laws in your area instead of sitting there crying about it.

I love the names of these political organizations...they always hide their true agendas. "America Votes" pushes only to get more liberals out to the polls yet their name suggests they try to increase voting in general. Disguising the truth...a staple of American politics. Why not call it what it is? "Liberal America Votes" or "Democratic America Votes".

I love the names of these political organizations...they always hide their true agendas. "America Votes" pushes only to get more liberals out to the polls yet their name suggests they try to increase voting in general. Disguising the truth...a staple of American politics. Why not call it what it is? "Liberal America Votes" or "Democratic America Votes".

Liars...every one of them

What about DJ Jazzy Puffy Diddy's little "Vote or Die" campaign in the '04 cycle. I think he meant "Vote for Kerry or I'll do a drive by on you".

even though this would clearly help the republicans... i think ALL the states should be using the same standard... or it's just not fair. so, overall, i don't mind if we switch to a district-by-district distribution of electoral votes... i just think every state should be on the same plan.

even though this would clearly help the republicans... i think ALL the states should be using the same standard... or it's just not fair. so, overall, i don't mind if we switch to a district-by-district distribution of electoral votes... i just think every state should be on the same plan

WRONG!!! It is and always should be a state's decision how they want to do it. People seem to forget this is the United STATES of America. If one state wants to give up any pull they have by splitting their electoral votes...so be it. They just need to realize they will probably lose a lot of the campaigning since candidates realize at best they will get 60% of the votes...whatever though...as long as it is decided by the individual states and not one more federal mandate overstepping its bounds.

i'm not saying that california CAN'T do it. i'm saying that i'd prefer that all states were on the same standard... for fairness' sake. afterall, the point of an election is so that the people are heard... not so one state can out-maneuver another.

How is it fair that some bozo in Washington is telling states how they should run THEIR election??? The great thing about having different states with different rules is that you have the FREEDOM to leave one area if you do not like the laws. You also have a better chance of changing them if they are more local. The minute you make it a federal issue, you lose that freedom. People are heard in all sorts of ways. If one state feels it is beneficial to its people to do an all-or-nothing electoral vote so candidates spend more time here listening to the people, that is great. If another state says we want to split it so all its votes are counted in the national tally, that is fine too. The process does not have to be the same across all states to be fair.

Hey Rhinosaurus - why is it that so many Republicans (and especially conservatives) are so pro-States rights EXCEPT when it comes to marriage, then they are all for federal action? Seems like hypocrites to me?

Not all republicans/conservatives agreed with the marriage ammendment. That was a very devisive issue within those groups. The fear was that DOMA which gives states the right to not recognize gay marriage from other states would be overturned by some judge in Cali. or Mass. so they were seeking the ammendment. Personally I thought it was stupid. I think government should be out of marriage at all levels. Why does a state need to certify marriage anyway? It should be a personal commitment and a legal contract between people. It could be two people or 100 people...it could be all men, all women, some men and some women...who cares.

WRONG! It's a take all system now when the plurality gets to claim all the electoral votes. Big cities generally determine national elections as it stands today. I'm all for making every electoral vote count. This could also open the door for the viability of a new independent party which is desperately needed. COMPETITION IS GOOD, and more competition is good for the American taxpayer. Sorry Frost.

It's a take all system now when the plurality gets to claim all the electoral votes. Big cities generally determine national elections as it stands today. I'm all for making every electoral vote count. This could also open the door for the viability of a new independent party which is desperately needed. COMPETITION IS GOOD, and more competition is good for the American taxpayer.

I agree, Blackfin. We shoud change the electoral system to award electoral votes by each Congressional district.

I feel sorry for the hardworking backbone of California. They are seriously outnumbered by the nuts, fruits and flakes.

I agree with Rhinosaurusrex. All the position jockeying between the parties takes the focus off the issues and creates lots of bad blood. Any change to the system requires a national concensus that if fair for all or there will be no end to it. Note that I said concensus and not mandate. Any fair minded person knows that, in general, both the Republicans and Democrates would, and are, doing anything they can to get an advantage. They point their finger at the other party with one hand while crossing their fingers behind their back with the other.

Hey Rhinosaurus - why is it that so many Republicans (and especially conservatives) are so pro-States rights EXCEPT when it comes to marriage, then they are all for federal action? Seems like hypocrites to me?

If you stay on point with your questions people will answer you, but if you throw out some question totally off point and meant to be inflamatory....I doubt you will get far here.

Any change to the system requires a national concensus that if fair for all or there will be no end to it.

Explain the part that is not fair right now. I have seen several times people saying the current system is not fair. Please explain. Currently states have the right to change their system as they see fit to award their electoral votes. There does not need to be a national consensus or mandate for it to be fair. If a state wants to have their primary tomorrow...go for it...if they want to award all or split them...go for it. Let the states jockey for position all they want...that is their right. I am not seeing the "unfairness" that we need to have a national consensus to fix. If you do not feel your vote is being counted in your state, start a local initiative to change it or move to a state like Maine or Nebraska where it is not a take-all system anymore. Why does everything need to be addessed at a national level these days???

Between the caging lists and gerrymandering and minority intimidation and racist flyers and Diebold e-voting and lies and threats and "provisional" ballots and outright ballot fraud and ballot destroyal, I'm always amazed that the Republicans don't receive every vote already, but this just shows how desperate they are.

And since so many Republican Congressional districts are gerrymandered for maximum success, tying electoral votes to those slanted and stacked fraudulent districts certainly doesn't seem very democratic now does it? Which clinches it, the Republicans are sure to do this. I guess I should expect the door to door Kristallnacht style purging of liberals and moderates next.

Between the caging lists and gerrymandering and minority intimidation and racist flyers and Diebold e-voting and lies and threats and "provisional" ballots and outright ballot fraud and ballot destroyal, I'm always amazed that the Republicans don't receive every vote already, but this just shows how desperate they are.

And since so many Republican Congressional districts are gerrymandered for maximum success, tying electoral votes to those slanted and stacked fraudulent districts certainly doesn't seem very democratic now does it? Which clinches it, the Republicans are sure to do this. I guess I should expect the door to door Kristallnacht style purging of liberals and moderates next.

There is nothing "Independent" in this posting. You may wish to change your party...either one will do since they both lie, gerrymander, and do all they can to make sure they win the election. Anyone who feels these actions are party specific is either a moron or a liar...which are you?

In my opinion, there is an underlying issue here. An issue that gets little press but is perhaps one of the most important in this country's history. ............. With computing power growing exponentially, with social research growing more sophisticated and with all of the data mining done by the phone companies and the federal, state and local governments, what will be the future of election campaigns and other campaigns to change public policy?

Then in my state of Texas, Republicans couldn’t defeat six veteran Democrats who kept winning GOP-leaning House seats. So they convinced the Texas Legislature to redraw the state’s congressional lines for a second time in a decade, to stack these swing districts with even more Republicans.

You people are so disingenuous it's sickening. You're nothing but a political hack disguised as a journalist, like most of the MSM.

The Dems have been redrawing congressional lines in Texas for the last 50 year to "stack" their vote against the GOP, but that was different, right?

You people really are disgusting!!!

Edit:: I failed to recognize the article was written by a political hack of the Dem party. A dem omitting facts to make a point should have been expected on my part.